Methods

In 1985, plant remains were recovered from a variety of feature contexts, including three burial pits, 13 pits and basins containing mixed fill (including one pit, Feature 30, which is associated with a prehistoric occupation), one tree stump stain, one wall trench, and three charcoal-filled pits (one of which contained abundant corn remains). A total of 605 liters of fill was processed by flotation to yield the samples analyzed for this report. In the text, percentage and ubiquity values refer to 1985 data only unless otherwise specified. Results from charcoal-filled pits are presented separately, as are those from Feature 30.

Recovery

All plant remains analyzed were drawn from flotation samples processed in the field using a device similar to the SMAP machine described by Watson (1976). Water was mechanically pumped from the Eno River into a 55-gallon drum, agitating the water into which each soil sample was poured. The resulting light fraction was collected in a U.S. Standard Geological sieve with 0.71 mm mesh; the heavy fraction was collected in a 1/16-inch mesh screen. All flotation samples were measured by volume in buckets as they were collected, generally in 10-liter quantities. Highly consistent recovery was achieved by limiting processing to a small number of crew members. All samples were dried for about a day before processing to facilitate charcoal recovery.

Analysis

The method of analysis approximates that described by Yarnell (1974). Each sample is sifted through a series of U.S. Standard geological sieves ranging from 6.35 mm to 0.21 mm. Carbonized plant materials greater than 2.00 mm in diameter were sorted completely and quantified by weight. Material passing through the 2.00 mm sieve was searched only for seeds, cultigen remains, and plant materials not found in the largest size category. Quantities of plant remains in the 1.41-0.71-mm size category were then extrapolated on the basis of their proportional representation in the 6.35-2.00-mm category. This procedure assumes that proportions of various items in a given sample are similar in all size categories retained in screens of size 0.71 mm and larger. Although this assumption is not always justified, it is useful in offering a more realistic estimate of absolute quantities of plant remains in a sample. For purposes of comparison, relative quantities are most important, and these are ultimately derived from fully sorted material. Plant remains from Feature 36 were sorted completely only through the 2.38 mm screen due to the large size of this sample. These results were not extrapolated.

Extrapolated weights of plant remains are presented in Table 26 and Table 27; percentages of plant food remains by weight appear in Table 28. Seeds are reported as aggregate weights and percentages in Table 26, Table 27, and Table 28; counts of seeds and fruits appear in Table 29. Corn, common bean, peach pit, and nut remains are itemized by weight as well as by number.

Methods of Comparison

Calculation of percentage of plant food remains by weight is a simple method by which to compare items of similar physical composition that have similar food-to-waste ratios (e.g., walnut shell and hickory shell). However, most plant foods differ in how much food they represent and in likelihood of preservation. For this reason, proportions of remains by weight can be misleading. For example, acorn shell usually comprises a smaller proportion of an assemblage by weight than hickory nutshell (which is more durable and more likely to have been preserved through use as fuel) even though acorn probably represents more food per unit of shell weight. In this case, an adjusting factor can be used (discussed below) to provide a more realistic estimate of food represented. Another method of comparison involves calculating the ubiquity of each food type as the percentage of features from which it was recovered. This method does not take account of quantities and is thus more suitable for comparing remains dissimilar in preservability and food-to-waste ratio. Ubiquity values appear in Table 30.